Blogaround

1. China’s Facebook Goes Dark, Taking a Generation’s Memories With It (December 4) Wow! Renren, China's version of Facebook, has shut down. I had a Renren account, long long ago. But it's been years since I thought about Renren. Totally forgot it existed.

But one important takeaway from this is to not trust websites like this to store your photos/ whatever other data forever for you. I keep all my photos on my computer or external hard drive- with a cloud service (that I pay money for) as a backup. I don't trust any clouds- maybe someday those big companies will suddenly change their policies and make it massively inconvenient or impossible to access your photos, and when you complain about it and try to tell them how irreplaceable those photos were, they will be like *shrug*.

If a family member posts a good photo on Facebook, I save it to my computer. I don't trust that Facebook will always exist and will always have a way to easily find old photos. Everyone should do this! It boggles my mind that some people look at photos of themselves that their friends posted on Facebook- for example, your friends who attended your wedding posted photos- and then don't download them, and just believe that those photos will always be there on Facebook and they can look at them any time. !!!!! I don't trust any clouds.

2. How South Korea’s Robust Protest Culture Shut Down Martial Law—For Now (December 7) 

3. Why RFK Wants to Ban Fluoride (December 2) 

4. Liveblog! Trans Lawyer Chase Strangio Badgers SCOTUS For 'Health Care,' 'Equal Protection' (December 4) "Strangio represents the families and is the first out trans lawyer ever to argue before SCOTUS. This very minute is fucking historic, y’all."

5. Advent Calendar Advent Calendar (December 2) lolllllllll

6. TikTok Ban: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO) (November 21) "And again, I am not giving TikTok a pass here. I'm just pointing out that its behavior is pretty consistent with Silicon Valley's own very shitty standards."

7. President Bashar Al-Assad Has Fled Syria and His Brutal Regime Is Finally Over (December 8, via) "Since the start of the Syrian civil war in 2011, Assad has gone to brutal lengths to cling to power—including by deploying devastating chemical attacks on civilians, including children. All told, by 2022, more than 306,000 civilians had been killed in the war, according to the UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner."

8. If you're interested in obscure features of the fossil record which can't be adequately explained by young-earth creationism, here are 2 blog posts for you:

Millions of Moroccan Mosasaur Teeth Create Dental Crisis for Flood Geology (November 29) "If all these teeth were deposited in a single year during the Flood, why are they concentrated in specific layers and not scattered throughout the geological column?"

Flood Geology Can’t Explain Dino Droppings (November 30) 

And a third one also from Joel Duff: Building Truth on Sand: The Hidden Cost of Sharing False ‘Evidence’ for Creation (December 4) "I found no evidence that this behavior exists at all in any ant species"

9. Peaceful Solutions (December 8) "The tens of millions of people who have been financially ruined and who have died suffering needlessly from engineered systemic neglect also were human beings, just as Brian Thompson was, and they also had families that loved them, just as Brian Thompson did. By the tens of millions, the survivors also mourn the killing of their loved ones—whose deaths, while enacted by deliberate choice and with clear motive, are not deemed murders, because the decisions that caused their anguish and death were legal, and, more to the point, were extremely profitable."

"The Giving Manger" (gonna try this out with my kid)

Book cover for "The Giving Manger" by Allison Hottinger and Emily King. Image source.

So I recently bought the book The Giving Manger [affiliate link] for my son. (That link is for the set that includes the book and a small manger, but I bought just the book- don't have an Amazon link for that though.) This is an activity you can do with kids during the Christmas season, to teach them to help other people.

Basically, the book is about a family where the dad made a little wooden manger and said that throughout the month of December, any time they help people, they add a piece of straw to the manger, to get ready for baby Jesus. Because Jesus said, in the parable of the sheep and the goats, "whatever you did for the least of these, you did for me"- which means that helping other people is helping Jesus. (And, full disclosure, the idea that "helping other people is helping Jesus" is one of the most important Christian beliefs to me. Like I am SO HERE for this.)

I first heard about this activity from commenter 'Becca a year ago, and then I happened to come across this book, so yeah I'm gonna go ahead and try this with my son. He's preschool-age. We'll see what he thinks of it.

My initial thought, upon hearing about this activity, was that I don't really like the idea of... gamifying morality? Like I don't necessarily think it's good to conceptualize "doing the right thing" as ... counting up individual actions that you took? It should be more about your overall attitude towards other people. Having empathy and compassion because those are inherently good things. Helping other people because you believe that a world where people receive help for their problems is better than one where they don't. That sort of thing. Not like, doing "enough" good things to reach some personal "goal."

(Related to that: Is Christianity about how you as a individual can escape hell? Or is it about participating in building the kingdom of heaven on earth? Is the parable of the sheep and the goats meant to teach us how to get to heaven, or to teach us that we should help people who are in need? If something bad happens, but nobody can claim it's your fault, are you fine with that or does it still matter to you? Is sin bad because it separates the sinner from God, or because there is a victim who is hurt by it? Is it more important to not be called a racist, or to actually change society so that people do not suffer from the effects of racism? Even the idea of "helping other people is helping Jesus" can be seen as "gamifying morality"- shouldn't you help people simply because it's the right thing to do? [I have seen atheists criticizing Christians for that reason, but I disagree with the atheists there.])

But anyway, even though I don't think that counting up good deeds is a healthy mature adult way to view morality, I guess for children you have to start there. My son doesn't really have the concept of having compassion for people in a general abstract sense. So I guess to teach little kids about morality, you have to start out with very concrete actions they can do, and there has to be an obvious and immediate "payoff" to them.

So we'll try this out and see how it goes. Merry Christmas everybody~

---

Follow-up post: "The Giving Manger" Recap

---

Related:

Square Root's Advent Calendar 

Not Sure I Want My Kid Reading the Bible

Blogaround

1. Was Jesus Homeless? Yes, No, and Kind Of (December 2) "When I worked as a housing case manager, part of my job was to determine if clients were literally homeless, according to the HUD definition."

Also from the same blog: “I Think I Might Not Die Now” (December 22) "I am blessed to work for an organization that believes in Housing First.  What that means is, once a person’s housing is taken care of, suddenly their medical needs and expenses go down."

2. Can the Star of Bethlehem be scientifically verified? (November 28) Part 1 of a blog series critiquing the video "The Star of Bethlehem," a documentary providing a scientific explanation for the star from the Christmas story in the bible. I actually have seen this video before (a long time ago, when I was evangelical). Perhaps some Christians would, after seeing the video, sum it up as "they found the star." [I just rolled my eyes so hard.] I now view it more like "here's a fan theory about what the star could have been." It's just somebody's idea, and there's nowhere near enough "evidence" to be making claims that this really is what the star actually was. (Honestly, for any date in history, you could probably look at the constellations and make up a story about how it totally means something.) Fun to make fan theories though!

Part 2: The Star of Bethlehem, a real event?
Part 3: Critique of ‘The Star of Bethlehem’ video
Part 4: Jupiter, Venus, Regulus, and Revelation: the fireworks of a real Star of Bethlehem?
Part 5: How did the Star of Bethlehem move like Tinker Bell?

3. A Few Math Problems for Mothers (July 13) "Felix had an accident during nap time and doesn’t have a spare pair of pants at school. If Felix’s father is listed as the primary point of contact on all documents, how many times does the school call his mother?"

4. Star Wars Christmas Parodies - "Padme Did You Know" and "I'm Dreaming of a New Death Star" (2015) This is AMAZING.

5. One Of The Most Astonishing Sudokus Ever (December 15) 1-hour-37-minute sudoku solve video. I love it.

6. Mary and Jesus in the Eyes of Chinese Painters (December 24) "He reinterpreted Da Vinci’s famous 'Last Supper' in traditional Chinese style, featuring a table, stools, tableware, windows, lanterns, and clothing unique to China."

7. Noncon Porn Taught Me About Rape (2016) "When I was a young fan, I remember reading a bunch of posts that said something like this: 'When you write fanfic, warn for rape if you’re treating the subject seriously as something that traumatizes the victim. Warn for noncon if it’s treated as sexy or if the victim starts consenting part of the way through. Warn for dubcon if the characters’ ability to give consent is dubious– for instance, fuck-or-die, sex pollen, one character being another character’s boss, emotional coercion, or sex where one character is extremely drunk. Of course, in the real world, all of those are rape!'"

Also from the same blog: The Thrill of the Chaste, or Why Dawn Eden Should Not Have Casual Sex (2015) I love this, because it takes an argument like "you shouldn't have casual sex because xyz" and changes it to "if you are the sort of person that would have xyz result if you had casual sex, then you shouldn't have casual sex." It's about knowing yourself. Know what you want or don't want. Not about making rules about "this is how EVERYBODY feels."

8. So, at the beginning of December I posted Square Root's Advent Calendar, and said I would give an update on Square Root's opinions on it. Here's the update: He was very interested in the puzzle, and could do parts of it by himself. He seemed to totally ignore me when I read the bible verses to him. But hey, little kids do pick up on things, so maybe he listened even though he didn't act like it. *shrug*

Square Root's Advent Calendar

Advent calendar that looks like a 2D Christmas tree with 24 pockets under it. Image source.

So my little son is preschool-age now. He's old enough to actually have whole conversations, and so I decided I should do some more Christmas traditions with him now. He's old enough to actually talk about and understand Christmas traditions and the Christmas story. 

So I bought this Advent calendar which has 24 empty pockets, and I printed off bible verses, and I bought a little puzzle and put a few pieces in each pocket. The bible verses are from here: Bible Verse Advent Countdown for Kids – FREE Printable! It has 24 little cards, with extremely simplified bible verses that tell the story of Jesus' birth. And the puzzle is a Nativity scene.

Super excited for this Advent calendar! Every day my son can open the next pocket and we'll read the bible verse and he can add more pieces to the puzzle.

So that's my plan- but you know how little kids are... they may or may not go along with the plan. They care 0% about how much effort you put into it or how important it is to you.

Anyway, yesterday we opened pocket #1. Square Root was very interested in the puzzle pieces (there were 3 pieces the first day). While he was trying to put them together, I read him the bible verse: "God sent the angel Gabriel to a girl named Mary," and then asked him, "Do you remember who Mary is?" but he totally ignored me, and then the puzzle pieces reminded him that he has a dinosaur puzzle, so he asked me to get it for him. 

So that's how that's going.

Anyway, I'm curious about how much he'll understand about the Christmas story, and what he'll think about it. He has a few books about baby Jesus, and he has a toy nativity set, so he's at least vaguely familiar with the characters in the story. I plan to blog about this again later, to let you all know Square Root's thoughts on it. (Edit: here's the update.)

That's all~ Very excited for Advent~

 

---

Related:

Taking My Kid To Church (Blog Series)

Taking My Kid To Church: God Loves My Son

Not Sure I Want My Kid Reading the Bible

Blogaround

1. Roundup of Submissions | October 2021 Carnival of Aces | Attraction (#2) (posted November 2) Lots of good posts here, about the topic "attraction", from an asexual perspective. Several posts question why attraction is emphasized so much in the asexual community- yeah, definitely worth reading.

2. Kids these days with their unholy justice (posted October 28) "The very same rejection of unjust 'holiness' our friend condemns as 'modern moral interpretation' can be found in the Bronze Age sermons of the prophets and in the first-century Gospels, Acts, and epistles, in which this supposedly 'modern morality' is attributed, at various points, to every member of the Trinity."

3. UN to Elon Musk: Here's that $6 billion plan to fight world hunger (posted November 18) "The back-and-forth between Musk and Beasley kicked off with a CNN interview last month in which Beasley asked billionaires to 'step up now, on a one-time basis' to help combat world hunger, specifically citing the world's two richest men: Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos." 

This is SO FASCINATING to me because I've always heard those stats about "it would cost $X million to solve this huge global crisis, if only Y rich person donated 1% of their wealth/ if only Americans spent 1% less on non-essential item Z" ... but I've always thought it's more complicated than that. It's not like you gather a billion dollars in cash and then walk in to the "end world hunger" store and problem solved. It takes time, hiring people, planning meetings, big diplomatic discussions, etc etc etc. (I blogged about this a little last year- If We Literally Stopped Spending Billions on Christmas... Well Basically That's What COVID Lockdowns Are.) 

I am really interested to see how this turns out. I hope that there really is an effective plan that will help hungry people, and I hope Musk really donates, and I hope it really works and makes a difference.

4. The Vaginismus Network. I just discovered this useful site about vaginismus. Definitely worth reading if you have experienced problems getting your vagina to open, like I have.

5. Jesus and Hagar: the Form of a Slave (posted 2020) [content note: slavery, rape] "Celia was raped repeatedly by the man who claimed ownership of body, ultimately, bearing him children. Hagar was given by the woman who claimed ownership of her body to a man who would forcibly impregnate her and, she gave birth to his child."

Trans and Religious

A church with a rainbow flag over the door. Image source.

For Advent this year, I'm giving money to support trans people, and posting links to some good articles about trans people and Christianity.

Today I want to share this post by Shannon T. L. Kearns, How Do You Reconcile Your Trans Identity With Your Religion?

Can I tell you a secret? You don’t actually have to reconcile your faith and your sexuality/transness. Not really. What you need to do is free your mind from the narrow view that says there is only one way to understand Christianity. That there is only one interpretation of Scripture. That there is only one way to read the Bible. That there is only one way to get into Heaven (and that getting into Heaven is the be all end all of the Christian life). Because once you do that work; once you really understand what it means to be a follower of Jesus (and what it doesn’t mean) then you will find that there is no reconciliation to be done. Because you’ll find that who you were created to be is good and holy and beautiful.

(go read the whole thing)

Also this: The journey of one transgender Latina in the church, about Nicole Garcia, a trans Latina woman.

The report Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey found that while discrimination against transgender individuals was pervasive, “people of color in general fare worse than white participants across the board, with African American transgender respondents faring far worse than all others in most areas examined.”

For example, while transgender people are twice as likely to lose their jobs as the general population, transgender people of color are four times more likely to face unemployment, the report says. The majority of those killed in transgender hate crimes are transgender women of color, according to Transgender Day of Remembrance.

“We didn’t stop being black, Latino, Asian or Native American just because we became trans,” noted Kylar Broadus, executive director of the Trans People of Color Coalition.

On a grass-roots level, Garcia said she has experienced a wonderful welcome at Mount Calvary Lutheran in Boulder, Colo., where she serves currently as a seminarian. And two other Colorado churches, St. Paul Lutheran in Denver and Christ the Servant Lutheran in Louisville, have given her funds toward tuition.

Yet Garcia still wonders if a congregation will accept her as a minister just as she is. “How can I feel comfortable as a Latina with dark skin in a denomination where inevitably at least 90 percent of the congregants in any ELCA church will be white?”

Garcia is very aware that when she graduates, she will have up to $25,000 in student loans. “Even though I have church credentials as a national church leader and a background in counseling, who will hire a 58-year-old Latina trans clergyperson?”

The answer to that question will help determine how radically inclusive mainline churches can be moving forward.

(go read the whole thing)

Merry Christmas everyone~ If you have money, consider donating to trans people in need on the #TransCrowdFund hashtag, or to Trans Lifeline.

How Churches Can Welcome Trans People

A church steeple. Image source.

During Advent this year, I'm giving money to support trans people, and if you are financially able then you should too. :)

And this week I want to share some articles about what churches should do to welcome trans people:

How to tell if your church is welcoming for transgender people (from Queer Theology)

If your website says nothing about transgender people I will automatically assume that you are not welcoming of transgender people.

...

How do you refer to God on your website? Do you use only male pronouns? Or only binary pronouns?

Do you have lots of gender specific ministries and groups? If so do you make clear that transgender people are welcome in those groups? Do you have groups for transgender or non-binary identified people? (And really, do you need gendered groups to begin with?)

Being a pastor for trans people (Elizabeth Palmer interviews Tracy Nolan)

When talking to a person who identifies as trans, use the pronouns and name that the person asks you to use. When in doubt, ask. If you make a mistake, apologize and move on.

Consider how you might be perceived as a minister. Identify yourself as a safe person through your language and interaction.

Don’t assume that someone who identifies as trans is broken or needs pity.

Pay attention to how you might advocate for someone—but first offer and ask their permission. Some may not want your advocacy, or it might not be safe for them to be public about their trans identity.

Don’t “out” anyone. Their story is theirs to share, and they may not share it with everyone for very valid reasons.

Have a good Advent, everyone, and let's continue to support trans people by donating money on #TransCrowdFund or to Trans Lifeline.

Trans Theology on Binaries and Genesis 1

Photo taken at dusk, showing some buildings' silhouettes and red-tinted clouds. Image source.

This Advent, I'm supporting trans people financially and encouraging other cis people to do so too. And today I want to share some transgender Christian theology with you. ^_^

Here's an excerpt from Nonbinary gender and the diverse beauty of creation, by Austen Hartke:

Because the ancient Israelites tended to separate their world into binaries (take a look at the kashrut laws that govern acceptable and unacceptable foods, for instance), it’s not surprising that Genesis 1:27 breaks humans into two groups as well—male and female. But I’ve also concluded that this verse does not discredit other sexes or genders, any more than the verse about the separation of day from night rejects the existence of dawn and dusk, or the separation of land from sea rejects the existence of marshes and estuaries.

United Methodist deacon M Barclay, who identifies as neither male nor female but as nonbinary, puts it this way: “This chapter talks about night and day and land and water, but we have dusk and we have marshes. These verses don’t mean ‘there’s only land and water, and there’s nowhere where these two meet.’ These binaries aren’t meant to speak to all of reality—they invite us into thinking about everything between and beyond.”

Just as we call God the Alpha and the Omega, implying all things from first to last and in between, the author of Genesis 1 is using a poetic device to corral the infinite diversity of creation into categories we can easily understand.

...

When we attempt to box God’s creation in by looking to Genesis 1:27 and expecting every person on earth to fall into line, we’re asking the text the wrong question. If Genesis 1 was meant to describe the world as it is, the biblical authors would have needed a scroll hundreds of feet long. Thank goodness we don’t have to slog through verse after verse that reads like a biology textbook on taxonomy, naming creature after creature from the elephant down to the paramecium. Just as we wouldn’t expect astronomers to cram things like comets and black holes into the categories of sun or moon, we shouldn’t expect all humans to fit into the categories of male and female. Instead of asking the text to define and label all that is, we can ask God to speak into the space between the words, between biblical times and our time, and between categories we see as opposites.

(Go read the whole thing. It's good.)

I love this. Back when I was a good evangelical, I thought I knew everything about the bible. Turns out I only knew one narrow interpretation. It's so valuable to read theology from writers from diverse backgrounds. The image of God lives in all people, and if our theology only comes from white, straight, cis, abled, conservative Christian men, then we're missing a lot. (I've also been reading Hartke's book, Transforming: The Bible and the Lives of Transgender Christians, which I highly recommend.)

Anyway, let's keep on supporting trans people by giving money to people in need on the #TransCrowdFund hashtag, or to Trans Lifeline.

Have a good Advent, everyone~

Blogaround

Doge and a wreath of Advent candles. Image has a bunch of text phrases like "very anticipate", "much candles", and "such Advent." Image source.

1. TMI: Vaginismus, Me, and Why We Need to Talk Abut Female Sexual Dysfunction (posted 2015)

2. Three decades later, men who survived the 'gay plague' speak out (posted 2017)

3. Dutch church holds 800-hour service to save family from deportation (posted November 29) I posted a link about this last week. As of this November 29 article, it's still going.

4. Dumbledore's Dark Twin: Aurelius Explained | Fantastic Beasts Theory (posted November 29) [content note: spoilers for "Fantastic Beasts 2: The Crimes of Grindelwald"]

This Advent, Let's Give Money To Trans People

Transgender pride flag. Image source.

For Advent this year, I've decided to give money through #TransCrowdFund. This is a hashtag that trans people use on twitter when posting their fundraising needs. Go over there and pick one and donate~

J. Skylar, the creator of the hashtag, said this about the economic violence that trans people face:

Some trans people face economic violence in the form of employment discrimination. Others face housing discrimination. Numerous trans people suffer health care discrimination and many trans people face these injustices simultaneously. The “Fight For $15” doesn’t mean much to a trans person who can’t find employment or is terminated without legal recourse. Maintaining a full-time job isn’t exactly easy if you’re homeless due to housing discrimination. Many trans people have to rebuild their entire lives after coming out as trans, which can include losing financial assets after a divorce or leaving the family home. Trans people of color run a higher risk of facing these issues than our white counterparts. Many trans people, especially trans women of color, are dependent on sex work for survival, which inherently runs the risk of racial profiling, incarceration, and legal fees. Trans people who make sex work their career of choice face these hurdles as well.

Additionally, cis people tend to assume trans people have only themselves to care for, but many trans people are financially responsible for children and extended family. As you can see, there is a never-ending myriad of ways trans people face economic violence.

Every week during Advent, I'm going to look through the #TransCrowdFund hashtag and pick a few to donate to. If you have money to give, you can do it too~

If you don't like the idea of giving money directly to strangers on the internet, you can donate to Trans Lifeline. Or any of the other organizations mentioned in this article: How to Help Transgender People Fight the Trump Administration's New Policy Memo.

Personally, I have questions about the effectiveness of giving money to individual people rather than organizations- seems like just a temporary solution; it won't change the system that creates these problems in the first place. And I have thoughts about my own tendency, when looking through the various posts on this hashtag, to judge who is "really" in need. Related to that, it's quite messed-up that people are required to perform their neediness for strangers on the internet in order to get enough money to survive.

But for now I've decided to do this and think of it as a Christmas gift. We can help a few individual people with their immediate needs right now. Let's do it~

--------------------

Related:
Dear Christians: Here's how to ACTUALLY love transgender people (A post with lots of links to information about trans people and the discrimination they face)

Honest Advent Wrap-Up

A Christmas candle and an open bible. Image source.

This year I did something I called "Honest Advent," where I read Advent scripture readings and blogged my honest opinions about them. This was COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from how I read the bible in the past. Evangelical culture teaches that good Christians need to read the bible every day, for 5 or 10 minutes at the very least (but longer is better, obviously- I would do 40 minutes to an hour every morning back when I was in college), and there would always be a moral lesson, or a deep truth about God, or something like that, that we would learn from any passage we read. We had to view the bible as a magic, perfect book where every single passage was always good and right and had something useful to say for our daily lives.

We weren't allowed to think "this is wrong" or "this is bad" or "this is pointless." Yes, we were allowed to think "I don't understand this" or "this seems wrong/bad/pointless" but that just meant we needed to go ask around to find someone who could explain why the awful passage in question totally was NOT awful. (Ever notice how Christians in that culture use terms like "she has doubts" or "she has questions" to describe someone who VERY CONFIDENTLY DOES NOT BELIEVE what the bible says and is very much NOT looking for "answers" about it? It's because, in their experience, criticism of the bible is not allowed to just be criticism of the bible; no, it's always a precursor to an apologetics lesson on why the criticism is invalid and the bible is totally right and good.)

In short, it was a method of reading the bible which did not allow me to be honest. And I've realized that even though I'm no longer evangelical, I still think of bible-reading that way. I read a passage and I see all these WTF-tastic things, and then I feel bad because I can't turn it into some cute little life lesson, tied up in a nice bow, and then just move on with my day. And I feel like I'm a bad Christian because I'm not able to read the bible that way anymore.

That's why I decided to do Honest Advent. Just read it and honestly tell you what I think. If it's awful, I'm going to say it's awful.

And wow, this was really really good for me. I'm so glad I did it. There were passages I read this month that were awful, and I said so. There were passages that challenged central doctrines in the evangelical church- and I said so. And there were passages that were so good. And I said so.

And the passages that were good were very good.

About justice, about love and goodness and incarnation. I'm so excited about those things. I found myself thinking, "YES, I really believe this."

When I gave myself the freedom to say that some things in the bible were bad, it meant that when I said some things were good, I really meant it. I would read a passage and say "I love this" and I knew that was honest, that I really did love it, that I really did believe it- because if I didn't, I would totally say so.

It showed me that my excitement over things like incarnation and resurrection is really genuine. I really do believe in those things. If I didn't, I would say so, just like I very explicitly say things like "I don't have a personal relationship with God" or "I don't believe God intervenes in the world in response to prayer" and I would not feel one bit bad about it.

I actually enjoyed reading the bible for Honest Advent. Because I didn't see it as a situation where I have to manufacture certain positive feelings or else I'm a bad Christian (which is how I had been thinking of it, which is why my choice to very rarely read the bible is healthy for me). There was no pressure; I just wrote what I really thought. It was really freeing to read the bible that way.

Because yeah, there's stuff in the bible that's awful and wrong and bad. If I'm free to say that, then I know that when I say something is good, I really mean it. And that makes me feel like a Christian again.

Honest Advent: Incarnation

Image text: "Immanuel. God with us. The Incarnation." Image source.

Matthew 1:18-25

This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.

But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”

All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).

When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

"Immanuel" which means "God with us."

That's why I love Christmas. It's about incarnation, which, along with resurrection, is the entire foundation of my religious beliefs. Incarnation and resurrection.

Yes, I believe in The Incarnation; I believe Jesus was a real person who was God in human flesh. But far more important than The Incarnation is incarnation. "God is with us, right here, right now, always," is far more important than "2000 years ago in the Middle East, God became a person."

I believe God is with us, God is in us, God is watching all the time, and God feels every emotion we feel. God is empathy.

Back when I was an evangelical, we focused so much on apologetics, on arguing that yes, the Christmas story is TOTALLY a HISTORICAL FACT. We had to shoot down any doubt as fast as possible. People quoted probabilities about prophecies, historical records about Herod, estimates for when the gospel of Matthew was written.

It was all about proving how The Incarnation was totally definitely literally true. The actual meaning of incarnation, as a concept, was an afterthought.

Same thing for resurrection. I believe The Resurrection literally happened, but resurrection is far more important to me now than The Resurrection. We will all rise again, and there will be no more death or pain.

Immanuel. God is with us. Incarnation.

Merry Christmas everyone~

Honest Advent: Gaslighting Is Not Okay, Even If It's Biblical

Silhouettes of a person on top of a slope reaching down to help someone who's lower. Image source.

Let's take a look at a passage from Two Corinthians, Donald Trump's favorite book of the bible. 2 Corinthians 4:3-6:

And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. For what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of God’s glory displayed in the face of Christ.

Whoa. Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa, NOT COOL.

Oh man this is bad. "The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God." So it's saying that non-Christians just aren't able to understand Christianity- they are "blinded" by an external force- and therefore any objections they have to Christianity are automatically invalid.

It's saying that people who don't believe in Christianity aren't able to think clearly and see reason about it. They only reject Jesus because they're influenced by some other shady forces. It's saying people aren't able to take a look at evidence and arguments and make a reasonable, educated decision on which religion, if any, is worth following- no, if they're not Christians, it's only because they're "blinded."

That is messed-up.

But I've heard this before. This is what I was taught in church. Non-Christians just don't *get* the bible because they "don't have the Holy Spirit." People don't believe in Jesus because they "love their sin" even though they secretly know Christianity is right. They make decisions that go against "God's commands" because of "temptation." Former Christians "lose their faith" because they were "led astray by the world" and "fell away."

Basically, a lot of different ways to say, "People who disagree with us don't have actual, rational reasons for their beliefs. They have dishonest ulterior motives, or maybe they're being tricked by some sinister influence and they're not able to think clearly."

That's a bunch of Christian-supremacist crap. And it's gaslighting. "Gaslighting" is when you claim that someone's actual lived experiences aren't really real, when you try to manipulate them into doubting their own mind. In this case, it's Christians claiming that non-Christians just aren't capable of even understanding what Christianity is and why it's so great, and therefore any opinions they have about it are automatically invalid. It's a refusal to actually engage with them, take them seriously, treat them as rational human beings capable of intelligent thought. No, they're "blinded." That's why they don't agree with us. Not because they actually have actual reasons.

This is not okay. Yes I know it's in the bible, but that doesn't make it okay. The bible also says "love your neighbor" and this Christian-supremacy nonsense sure as hell isn't love.

Honest Advent: "Disobedient" is an Odd Word to Use Here

A teenage girl not listening to her father. Image source.

Today's Honest Advent reading is Ephesians 5:6-14:

Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God’s wrath comes on those who are disobedient. Therefore do not be partners with them.

For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light (for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness and truth) and find out what pleases the Lord. Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. It is shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret. But everything exposed by the light becomes visible—and everything that is illuminated becomes a light. This is why it is said:

“Wake up, sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.”

First of all, the stuff about light and exposing evil is great. Don't cover up evil. Expose it. Just like Jesus said, there is nothing hidden which will not be disclosed. Yes. The truth will always come out eventually.

But I have a concern about the word "disobedient." It appears twice in this passage: "Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God’s wrath comes on those who are disobedient" and "It is shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret."

What does "disobedient" mean? It means someone who breaks the rules. As in, there are clearly-defined rules we are supposed to follow, and a "disobedient" person does not follow them.

That was the system of morality I used to believe in: God gives rules, and we have to follow them. Most of them- "do not steal", "do not kill"- make sense. We can see obvious reasons why it's good to follow those rules. But that's not the point. In this view, it doesn't matter if we can understand the reasons behind the rules. God commanded it, and that's that. That's why we also get rules that seem arbitrary/unimportant/baseless/anti-human, like "don't say 'oh my god'" or "same-sex romantic relationships are bad" or "women can't be leaders in church." Christians who subscribe to the "God made these rules" view of morality then have to scramble to come up with some kind of reason why God would command those things. But let's get this clear: This scramble to come up with reasons isn't about actually honestly evaluating whether the rule is worth following. Nope. It's an attempt to reassure yourself and others that this thing you're doing, basing your system of morality on blind obedience to "God's" commands, isn't a terrible idea. You already know you have to follow the rules, even if you can't find a single shred of anything that seems like a good reason- even if they actually seem like a really bad idea.

Fortunately, I no longer subscribe to that view of morality, where "disobedient" is the worst thing you can be. No, I believe "by their fruit you will know them," as Jesus said. People are able to understand morality and judge whether certain actions are right or wrong. We don't need a huge list of rules. If the bible commands something, but we can see that it's obviously a terrible idea, then nope, we're not following it. We are fully capable of making those kinds of decisions. We're not "too sinful" to know right from wrong, so sinful that we need to follow "God's rules" even if they seem completely terrible to us, because we can't trust our own sinful minds. (That's what I used to believe.)

In the view of morality I now follow, the term "disobedient" doesn't really make sense. It's not like we're children who don't know any better, and someone needs to make rules for us, which we could either obey or disobey. No, if I want to say someone did a bad thing, I would use a word like "immoral" or "evil." It's bad because it's cruel to people, not because it breaks some "rule."

And sometimes the most moral thing you can do is disobey "God's commands."

So getting back to Ephesians 5:6 and its use of the word "disobedient." Yeah, seems like all the bible translations use that word here. So. Okay, then I disagree with the bible.

And one more thing: the bit about "It is shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret" totally contradicts everything these verses say about exposing evil. Like, is there something I'm missing here? How can you expose "the fruitless deeds of darkness" if it's "shameful" to talk about them?

All right, that's all I have to say about this passage. I really like the stuff about exposing evil, bringing everything into the light. But the writer's use of the term "disobedient" indicates that I have some ideological differences with the writer.

Honest Advent: When the World's "Justice System" Sucks

Courtroom. Image source.

For Honest Advent, let's take a look at Psalm 43:

Vindicate me, my God,
and plead my cause
against an unfaithful nation.
Rescue me from those who are
deceitful and wicked.
You are God my stronghold.
Why have you rejected me?
Why must I go about mourning,
oppressed by the enemy?
Send me your light and your faithful care,
let them lead me;
let them bring me to your holy mountain,
to the place where you dwell.
Then I will go to the altar of God,
to God, my joy and my delight.
I will praise you with the lyre,
O God, my God.
Why, my soul, are you downcast?
Why so disturbed within me?
Put your hope in God,
for I will yet praise him,
my Savior and my God.

The first verse was what stood out to me. "Vindicate me, my God, and plead my cause against an unfaithful nation." Sounds like the writer is looking for justice, because society isn't giving him any. Maybe someone has done something very immoral and/or illegal to him, and they got away with it, and the people in power don't care.

(Please note that I'm not saying this is "my interpretation" of the passage, or "the right interpretaton", or "what this passage means." I have no idea what the situation was that the writer was writing about. But reading this prompted these opinions about justice, which I will now share.)

Okay first we need to clarify what "justice" means. The evangelical church taught me that "justice" means "everyone goes to hell." I'm not kidding. I'm not exaggerating. I'm not extrapolating or following their teachings to their unexpected logical conclusion. No, this was explicitly taught. Christian leaders said, "People always say they want justice. Nope, you don't want justice. Because you're a sinner too- you think 'justice' means God's going to punish someone you don't like, and you'll be just fine? No, what we want is mercy. Thank God for mercy. We're not getting the punishment we deserve (which is hell)."

That's what I believed. Fortunately, I don't believe that anymore; I now believe in the biblical definition of justice, which is "God has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble, God has filled the hungry with good things but has sent the rich away empty." "Justice" means lifting up and helping those who suffer, and bringing down and punishing the powerful people who cause that suffering.

Okay so we're all clear on what definition of "justice" I'm using. Now let's actually talk about the concept of calling to God for help when the world's "justice system" screws you over. Feminism talks about this a lot. Oppression is built into every part of our society, so there are many examples where the biases of those in power allow people to do very evil things and get away with it. The Black Lives Matter movement exists because the US has a real problem with murderers whose victims are black never being brought to justice. And then there's the horrible reality of rape culture: Only a small percentage of rapes are reported to police, and of those, only a small percentage of the rapists are actually punished by the law. Instead, rape victims are re-victimized by the "justice system", and there are judges who decide not to punish a rapist very harshly because that would just be too sad for the rapist.

And there are all kinds of other shady things that people get away with. Companies that mistreat their low-wage employees, and even though it's illegal, there's not really much the employees can do about it. Churches that cover up child abuse. And so on. People do these bad things, and there's just no way for the victims to get justice. The powers-that-be just aren't going to do it.

It just sucks.

So maybe, in that kind of situation, people ask God to bring justice. Unfortunately, I don't believe that's the kind of thing God does. Because think about it- if God was the kind of God who intervened to help people and bring justice, wouldn't God have stopped the bad thing from happening in the first place? If you're a God who's not going to stop a murder but you'll make sure the murderer goes to jail, well you're kind of useless. Like, you're the God of bad time management or something.

But I get how it can be helpful, psychologically, to pray for God to bring justice. To believe there's a God there who cares and can help you. And I believe that in the future there will be resurrection and justice, so, yeah, eventually God will do it.

The "justice system" can suck sometimes. That's not the way it should be. That's not the way it will be in the kingdom of God.

Honest Advent: God's Light

Sunlight coming through clouds. Image source.

The next Honest Advent reading is Isaiah 60:19-22:

The sun will no more be your light by day,
nor will the brightness of the moon shine on you,
for the Lord will be your everlasting light,
and your God will be your glory.
Your sun will never set again,
and your moon will wane no more;
the Lord will be your everlasting light,
and your days of sorrow will end.
Then all your people will be righteous
and they will possess the land forever.
They are the shoot I have planted,
the work of my hands,
for the display of my splendor.
The least of you will become a thousand,
the smallest a mighty nation.
I am the Lord;
in its time I will do this swiftly.”

This is great. I interpret this as a description of resurrection and the future kingdom of God. "Light" means goodness and truth- everything will be full of goodness and truth. No evil, no pain, no mourning.

When it says "the Lord will be your everlasting light," I do NOT take that to mean anything along the lines of a "personal relationship with God" like evangelicals believe. It would be possible to interpret that verse as "everyone will believe in the correct version of God, and it will be SO OBVIOUS, like a light shining" but NO, that's not what I believe.

Because everyone is able to experience God's goodness, regardless of their beliefs about God. That's what we are all doing right now, on this earth. When there are good things in our lives, those things are from God. It doesn't matter if we believe in God or not, it doesn't matter if our beliefs about God are right or wrong- we still experience the pleasure from the good things in our lives. And that's what it will be like in heaven, as these verses describe. It's not about religious beliefs, it's not about "a personal relationship with God." Everyone can experience the goodness and light.

For the bit about "they will possess the land forever"- okay, now we're starting to see some signs that originally this was written just for the people of Israel, not the whole world. There's a bit of an "us vs them" dynamic contained in the concept of "possessing the land." Reassuring the readers that no one will take their land only makes sense if there is someone who could possibly take their land- if there are people who are not in the land.

Throughout the majority of the Old Testament, it was understood that God's promises and God's blessing were just for Israel. (Though there are a few exceptions.) In the New Testament, the idea that people could be Christians without being Jewish was SUPER-CONTROVERSIAL. But they decided yes, Christianity is for the whole world. This was a big change from the beliefs of Old-Testament people.

As for the part that says "the least of you will become a thousand, the smallest a mighty nation"- yeah that doesn't make any sense, mathematically. If one person, the least powerful person, becomes so great that they end up having power over a thousand people (or they have a thousand descendants, or whatever), then wouldn't they no longer be "the least"? It's not possible for every member of a set to be greater than at least 1000 other members of that set.

Seems like they're just using "thousand" and "mighty nation" as shorthand for great blessings and goodness, totally not thinking about the actual reality of one person having power over a thousand people.

The bible does this a lot, actually- using large numbers of people as nothing more than a symbol that affects one person. Look at how God punished David for taking a census by killing 70,000 people. So basically David's punishment is he has to deal with this crisis and feel guilty about it, and the punishment for each of those 70,000 people- who were totally innocent in this whole census-taking business- is death. How on earth does that make sense? Innocent people were hurt far more than the actual target of God's punishment. It only makes sense if you don't think of the 70,000 people as real people with their own complex, imperfect, valuable lives. Instead, they're nothing more than symbolic indicators related to David's status as king.

So we could say the writer wasn't really thinking through this whole "the least of you will become a thousand" thing, and it's not meant literally in any sense at all. But there's another possible interpretation, a very shady one. Perhaps those referred to as "you" and those referred to as "a thousand" are completely different groups of people. Perhaps it's saying "the least of you Israelite men will become rulers over a thousand women, slaves, and immigrants." As I said, in the Old Testament they didn't think God's promises were for everyone.

Maybe the "thousand" are treated as a status indicator for one person, rather than treated like real human beings, because the culture back then actually didn't treat everyone as real human beings.

I don't know if that's what the writer actually meant, but it's certainly true that the culture back then did not see women and men as equal, and of course that ends up being reflected in the bible they wrote. This is why I do NOT believe "what was the writer's original intent?" is the be-all-end-all of biblical interpretation. Yes, it's very important- but just because a writer held certain biased assumptions which influenced their writing does NOT mean that we need to respect and perpetuate those biased assumptions now.

Overall, I like this passage. God's light. It's about resurrection. Someday everything will be good.

-------

So about disqus: I'm finding I'm usually not able to see the disqus comment box at first, but then I load the page a second time and it's there. So... yeah still working on this.

Honest Advent: Jesus Hasn't Fulfilled This Prophecy

A statue of Justice, blindfolded, holding a set of scales. Image source.

For Honest Advent, I'm looking at Jeremiah 33:14-16:

“‘The days are coming,’ declares the Lord, ‘when I will fulfill the good promise I made to the people of Israel and Judah.

“‘In those days and at that time
I will make a righteous Branch sprout from David’s line;
he will do what is just and right in the land.
In those days Judah will be saved
and Jerusalem will live in safety.
This is the name by which it will be called:
The Lord Our Righteous Savior.’

I like this. It's about the kingdom of God and resurrection. It says someday, God will bring justice, righteousness, and safety.

Because "a righteous Branch ... from David's line" is mentioned, Christians take this to be a prophecy about Jesus- specifically, the birth of Jesus. But here's the problem: Did Jesus actually do these things? Did Jesus change the world (or Israel in particular) so it's now a place characterized by righteousness, totally safe, with perfect justice?

Ha. No.

Yes, Jesus was an activist who dedicated his life to love and justice, and spoke out against the corrupt powers of his day. Yes, he made a difference, and he set an example for us. But he didn't quite do what this verse says he would do. "Jerusalem will live in safety"? A lot of violent stuff has gone down in Jerusalem over the past 2000 years. (And not just Jerusalem- pretty much everywhere in the world has been not very "safe" at some point.) Jesus did "what is just and right in the land" as far as he was able, but the world is still a messed-up place.

Jesus did not fulfill this prophecy. Or rather, he hasn't yet. I believe he will eventually. But it's super shady when Christians say things like "There were SO MANY Old Testament prophecies about the messiah and Jesus fulfilled EVERY SINGLE ONE! That COULD NOT have happened by chance. This is PROOF that the bible is true!" Because, no. There are prophecies like this one, which talk about the utopia that God will eventually bring about, and guess what, that hasn't happened. (Yet.) So basically Christians are finding things in the Old Testament that seem sort of related to Jesus' life, and marking those as "messianic prophecies", and wow would you look at that, Jesus fulfilled them all 100%. Okay then. Circular argument is circular.

I believe what these verses in Jeremiah 33 are saying. Someday God will bring resurrection, and the whole world will be full of righteousness, justice, and safety. Jesus will do it. But he hasn't done it yet. So be very suspicious the next time someone tells you how "it's so amazing that Jesus fulfilled every Old Testament prophecy."

Honest Advent: The Bible Never Claims to be the Word of God

Image shows a silhouette of a stable and manger, with the text "The Word Became Flesh." Image source.

Today and tomorrow's Advent readings are both from John 1, so I'm combining them. John 1:1-9:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

There was a man sent from God whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.

The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world.

I really love this passage. The Word became flesh. (That bit comes later, in verse 14 actually.) "The Word" is Jesus (or at least, that's the only interpretation I've ever heard, but it doesn't necessarily say so explicitly- I'd be interested to know if there are Christians who believe "the Word" is something else), he is God's wisdom and God's light born into a real human person who lived among us. God with us. That's amazing.

Also, for the "through him all things were made" part, I take that to mean that Jesus is alive in so many things in this world. Jesus is everywhere, all around us. Jesus lives in us and in all the good things we experience. And yeah, I said I was doing "Honest Advent" because I don't believe in those big, abstract, feel-good spiritual ideas that don't necessarily make real-world sense- but this one I really do believe. God with us, God in everything good. I believe in incarnation. I do not believe in a God who actively does things in the world, but I believe in a God who is always with us, who sees everything and cares about everyone, and feels all the feelings at the same time we feel them. God is with us, and God is empathy.

But here's something that's a bit weird: Why does it say about John the Baptist "he himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light"? I believe God lives in everyone- yes, including John the Baptist. As it says here, "through him all things were made" and "that life was the light of men." So, in my view, is there really a distinction to make between a person- created in God's image, having God living inside- and the abstract idea of God's "light"? Yes, I definitely believe Jesus was unique- Jesus actually IS God, whereas the rest of us just have God living in us. But still. It's not like people are a completely separate thing from "the light."

I'm just saying, it feels a little weird to say so specifically that John the Baptist was NOT "the light." Maybe this is countering some widespread misconception that was floating around in that culture back then.

Here's the big takeaway from this passage though: Jesus is the word of God. The bible never says that the bible is the word of God.

Yeah. Think about that for a minute.

When modern Christians use the phrase "the word of God," they're always referring to the bible. But that's completely unbiblical. When the bible uses the phrase "the word of God" or "God's word", it is never referring to the bible. It may be referring to a specific quote from the bible- as in passages that are like "the word of the Lord came to so-and-so" and then the next quoted bit is "the word of the Lord." But the idea that "the word of God" means "the bible as we know it today" is just absurd. (And if I had a lot more spare time, it would be really interesting to take a concordance and find every single time the bible mentions "the word of God" and try to come up with a definition.)

As an aside, can we talk about 2 Timothy 3:16? "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness." Christians quote this verse as if it's saying "the entirety of the bible as we know it today is God-breathed", and if you spend one second thinking about it, you'll realize that's totally NOT what it's saying. What would the term "Scripture" have meant to the writer and original audience? It DEFINITELY COULD NOT have meant "the collection of 66 books that we now call 'the bible.'" Even if we know nothing about the history of how the bible was put together, logically we can say that the closest thing that the writer could have possibly meant is our modern bibles minus the book of 2 Timothy.

My guess is that the use of the word "scripture" there in 2 Timothy refers to the Pentateuch. But we can let the bible scholars answer that question.

And seriously, if you think about it, it's impossible that there could be a verse in the bible claiming something about the entirety of the bible. Because the writers didn't know what books would end up in the final version of the bible. Yeah, if you find a verse that's like "and all the other books that end up getting included with this one I am writing and printed as one whole big book, yeah all those books, even though I don't know which ones they are, they are TOTALLY God-breathed" then come talk to me.

--------------

lololol yesterday I could see the disqus box but today I can't. Readers, let me know if you're having troubles too.

Honest Advent: Am I Above the Bible?

Image text: "Why we believe the Bible." Yeah, acting as if "believe the bible" is a well-defined statement is a HUGE red flag. Image source.

Today's Honest Advent reading is Mark 13:33-37:

"Be on guard! Be alert! You do not know when that time will come. It’s like a man going away: He leaves his house and puts his servants in charge, each with their assigned task, and tells the one at the door to keep watch.

“Therefore keep watch because you do not know when the owner of the house will come back— whether in the evening, or at midnight, or when the rooster crows, or at dawn. If he comes suddenly, do not let him find you sleeping. What I say to you, I say to everyone: ‘Watch!’”

All right. Well the context here is Jesus is talking about the end of the world or the destruction of the temple in 70 AD (take your pick). SO MUCH SIDE-EYE from me for whoever decided to include this in a list of "Advent readings." Like we're supposed to read it and think it's about how Jesus is coming, as in, Christmas will be soon, but it's not about that at all.

Unless- wait. Are there some Christians who draw some kind of connection between Advent and "the second coming"? Like, both are about "waiting for Jesus to come." Wow I have never thought of that before.

And this bit about "keeping watch"- yeah, I don't buy that. I don't expect "the second coming" to happen in my lifetime, so I'm not going to modify my behavior based on it. If we should be kind to people, well there are way better reasons to be kind to people besides "what if Jesus suddenly appears when you are being mean?" Really not a fan of fear-based obedience.

(And I don't necessarily believe in "the second coming" anyway. I believe in resurrection- someday the whole world will be resurrected, but I don't really have any specific beliefs about the details. ["Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven."] But no, it won't be like the Left Behind books.)

All right. So overall I feel kind of "meh" about this Mark 13 passage. But here's what I really want to talk about today: For Honest Advent I'm reading the bible and just saying what I think. I'm not forcing myself to feel certain things ("close to God", inspired, spiritually deep) or feeling like I'm a failure as a Christian when I don't feel them. Because- I mean for real, why on earth would anyone expect they can spend 10 minutes reading a few sentences from a 2000-year-old book translated from an ancient language and come away with some cute little positive life lesson for the day? Like why do I feel like I'm a bad Christian because I can't manufacture those feelings? I'm not the one who's weird- the weird ones are those who expect each bible verse to be a sentimental little Hallmark card. (But that's really how I read the bible when I was an evangelical. Read a chapter, certain that I can understand it and find some way that God is speaking to me and it totally applies to my life now. What a bizarre thing to expect.)

So I'm just reading it and telling you what I honestly think. Some parts I like, some parts I don't. Some parts I agree with, some parts I don't.

It's like the bible is a thing which I judge and criticize. Like I'm the one who's in control, and I get to decide which parts are good and which are bad. That feels so weird and heretical. Back when I was an evangelical, I very strongly believed that the bible was an authority that I had to submit to. Everything in the bible is right and good, and if there's something I don't like, well that's my problem, I need to learn to accept it and believe that yes, it is right and good.

I thought the bible was an authority over my life- as if the bible was able to say things on its own. I now believe that no, the bible doesn't just say anything "clearly"; it's always people interpreting it. And before, when I believed I was submitting to God because I forced myself to accept what the bible said even when I didn't like it, I wasn't submitting to God or the bible- I was submitting to one particular version of God and one particular interpretation of the bible, the one created by 21st-century white American evangelical culture. Created by people.

And since it's created by people, it's not above questioning. They created a way to interpret the bible and told me it wasn't an interpretation, that it was just what the bible plainly said. That was a lie. And then I found Christian feminists who have a different interpretation, and that interpretation makes way more sense. (But here's the key: I say it "makes way more sense" because it fits with the worldview I already have, and my intuitive sense of what words like "morality", "justice", and "love" mean. For someone with a different worldview, maybe a different interpretation of the bible would "feel" more "obviously true." Everyone can create their own version of Christianity- not the other way around.)

Anyway, so about the bible. All Christians choose which parts are the most important and which parts we don't need to worry about. All Christians do this. Even the evangelicals/fundamentalists who boast "I believe the bible"- do they wear clothes with different kinds of material? Do they only own one shirt? Now you're going to say "well of course we don't have to follow those commands- they don't apply to us today." And I'm saying, yes, that's my point exactly, you've decided that these particular verses can pretty much be ignored, but the Romans road is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN ALL OF CHRISTIANITY, so yeah, just like I said, all Christians pick which parts of the bible are more important than others. And that picking is done solely based on people's opinions. There's nothing in the bible that says "HEY this verse is the most important verse in the bible, and then these ones here are only for the people in this culture." No. People decide that.

It's not actually possible to let the bible be an authority over your life. It's certainly possible to let an evangelical interpretation of the bible be an authority over your life- I used to live that way. But the bible itself doesn't really say anything about my life in an obvious way- no, it's people who determine how we should connect the bible to our modern lives. I feel like such a heretic for saying "I like this verse, I don't agree with that verse", but isn't that exactly what the evangelical church does, except they use more spiritual-sounding language? "Oh this one is a ceremonial law, so it's only for ancient Israel. Oh this one is about same-sex relationships, which we all know are disgusting, so obviously it's true for all of time." And even though the bible has A LOT TO SAY about foreskins, I don't think I've heard one single sermon on them.

The bible can't direct my life. I can either submit to someone else's interpretation of the bible, or make my own. Those are the only options. Submitting to the bible itself is not possible.

--------------

Note: So I am able to view the disqus comment box on IE but not on Chrome. (probably I need to restart Chrome...? but I have so many tabs open...) Anyway if you can see the disqus comment box, leave a comment and tell me what browser you're using. If you can't see it, send me a tweet I guess.